I’ve had a chance to read a lot lately about a variety of social issues that tie into urban planning (really what social issues don’t) and I’ve also had a chance to step back and look at some of the citizen-based efforts working to engage those problems from a more distant perspective (I’m currently in Iraq so I can only see such efforts through snippets on the internet and e-mails).  The approach I see however is somewhat troublesome and problematic.  There seems to be a recurring theme that as groups working to solve various issues (take for example neighborhood associations) become more complexly organized, they become less of an agent change and more of a middleman group used to make demands and coerce government agencies.  (Read more...)

It’s not that demands and coercion aren’t valid strategies, but when they become the only strategy it quickly allows reality to slip out of the grasp of citizen groups.  Citizen groups are a great place to pool resources and to obtain a diversity of knowledge that surpasses what most government agencies can afford to assemble (mostly because communities can leverage it for free).  However, from my observations it seems to be common that citizen groups slowly transition from a workgroup where people labor intensely to realize the fruits of their dreams toward an oligarchy that feels that their sole role is to inform government agencies of their desires.

The nature of citizen groups runs the gamut, and in some cases a purely advisory role is indeed the group’s place (though such groups usually exist in the context of a formally documented relationship with the applicable government agencies).  Groups also have some responsibility to ensure that their thoughts and visions are expressed to the agencies that can help facilitate them, but it’s important that it not be their sole function.  Take for instance a group that forms because of a neighborhood’s lack of social connection.  While the local government should certainly be an outlet for the groups advice and part of the group’s vehicle for change, there is a large impetus that group members be ready to roll up their sleeves and actually work to set the example of being a socially outgoing neighbor.

Other more technical examples exist as well.  Every community possesses an internal wealth of knowledge that in many cases will allow them to tackle the preliminary research and planning for a problem.  Group members can work to understand the intricacies of the problem, other places that have experienced and fixed such issues, and potential strategies.  Instead of highlighting a problem, citizens can work to propose a solution in a manner that would fit within the context.   Citizens can come poised with funding strategies that might help pay for their ideas or they can even propose specific changes in ordinance language that shows exactly what they want to see.

I don’t mean to discount the role of bringing attention to a problem, it is a certainly an important component of community involvement, but allowing a group to slip into a purely advisory group that expects government agencies to jump merely because of their bidding is not going to be effective.  Additionally by assuming such an advisory role, citizens are creating a setting where actions have little buy-in and the emotional context of community is removed.  Government agencies don’t have the time or the resources to act on the desires of every group that assembles itself.

A number of books and methods support active citizen involvement rather than passive citizen advising.  Author Peter Block focuses extensively on the role of citizens in his book Community:  The Structure of Belonging as well as in the book that he co-authored with John McKnight, The Abundant Community: Awakening the Power of Families and Neighborhoods.  Asset Based Community Development also examines how the skills of residents can be used to directly engage community problems.  Other authors have also shown that while advisory participation is the current status quo, there is a desire for direct engagement and citizens are looking forward to being part of the process rather than simply throwing their money or thoughts at a problem (Richistan by Robert Frank highlighted this evolution among the wealthy of today).

At any rate, it is important that citizens find ways to ease the burden of their demand on government agencies and work proactively to put their ideas into play.  Communities can thrive when their members invest their labors into improvement.

Image used from WikiMedia commons under Share Alike 3.0 License.